[Cascade]

lenze, on Feb 13 2004, 05:53 PM, said:

Quote

Do you alert?

NO!! The only alerts required are for your partnership agreements that are not standard. Your decision to bid 3NT has nothing to do with your partnership understandings.

If you have a partnership understanding about what 3NT shows then it may well be alertable.

Wayne

[lenze]

Cascade, on Feb 13 2004, 10:34 PM, said:

lenze, on Feb 13 2004, 05:53 PM, said:

Quote

Do you alert?

NO!! The only alerts required are for your partnership agreements that are not standard. Your decision to bid 3NT has nothing to do with your partnership understandings.

If you have a partnership understanding about what 3NT shows then it may well be alertable.

Wayne

How can there be a partnership understanding in this sequence? As Ben pointed out, 3 NT is a desire to play in 3 NT. I can bid it with Ben's example hand
(Tactical), or I can bid it with

S-Kxx
H-Ax
D-x
C-AKQTxxx

Since partner is clueless, it is up the the opponents to work it out.

[DrTodd13]

We certainly don't want to be in the business of differentiating between "tactical bids" and lawful "psyches." In my book, they are the same thing. I would differentiate (though it may be hard) between psyches that have a purpose and random bidding. Random bidding fits the definition of psyche...a gross misrepresentation of one's hand...but has none of the elegance or flare of a good psyche. In all my days, I've only run across one person who ever intentionally bid randomly and it was a miserable experience...it wasn't even bridge.

And I'll add my $0.02, there is no difference between psyching during the bidding and falsecarding during the play.

[Cascade]

lenze, on Feb 13 2004, 06:42 PM, said:

Cascade, on Feb 13 2004, 10:34 PM, said:

lenze, on Feb 13 2004, 05:53 PM, said:

Quote

Do you alert?

NO!! The only alerts required are for your partnership agreements that are not standard. Your decision to bid 3NT has nothing to do with your partnership understandings.

If you have a partnership understanding about what 3NT shows then it may well be alertable.

Wayne

How can there be a partnership understanding in this sequence? As Ben pointed out, 3 NT is a desire to play in 3 NT. I can bid it with Ben's example hand
(Tactical), or I can bid it with

S-Kxx
H-Ax
D-x
C-AKQTxxx

Since partner is clueless, it is up the the opponents to work it out.

If the bidding proceeds:

3♦ (P) 3NT (4♠)
?

Is partner allowed to double based on your 3NT call?

If not then you have a special partnership understanding that must be disclosed.'

Wayne

[the hog]

You cannot ban psyches in tournaments or anywhere else for that matter. They are expressly allowed in Bridge; if you ban them you may be playing some card game, but you are not playing bridge.

However if you are playing someone who psyches for the heck of it, just to creat mischief and randomise results, then that person should be liable to penalties.

Ron

[EricK]

As Wayne points out,

"A player may make any call or play (including an intentionally misleading call — such as a psychic bid — or a call or play that departs from commonly accepted, or previously announced, use of a convention), without prior announcement, provided that such call or play is not based on a partnership understanding."

However, it is the last clause which causes the problems.

Take the situation 3♦ (P) 3NT (4♠) P (P) 5♦

Responder has revealed a psyche, right? He is showing a hand like the one Ben showed? I think this deduction is based on a partnership understanding.

What about ♠Kx ♥Kx ♦Kxxx ♣Axxxx?

A natural 3NT response (7♦ 1♣ hopefully a major K from the lead), no reason to think that 4♠ won't make, and 5♦ has to be cheap.

Most common psyches IMO fall into this category, experienced partners "work out" that partner has psyched before it is actually proved, and I think that this is against the laws.

Eric

[mikestar]

An attempt to define terms:

Psychic Bid: A call which deliberately and grossly misrepresents the player's high-card strentgh and/or suit length. For example opening 1♠ with a stiff or 6 HCP. This is the ACBL's official definition.

Tactical Bid: A call which deliberately but not grossly misrepresents the player's high-card strength or suit length.

Strategic Psychic: A psychic bid made because the bidding situation makes the odds of success favorable. Ben's example is a good one.

Destructive Psychic: A psychic bid made without regard to chances of success or in spite of high probability of failure in order to randomize results or disconcert opponents. Example overcalling a Precision 1♣ with 1♠ regardless of your strength or spade length, when your partnership agreement is that 1♠ is natural or some other convertion. (If overcalling 1♠ in this fashion is your partnership agreement, this is legally a Destructive Convention--it isn't any form of psychic.)

This post has been edited by mikestar: 2004-February-15, 00:38

[the hog]

mikestar, on Feb 15 2004, 02:47 AM, said:

Destructive Psychic: A psychic bid made without regard to chances of success or in spite of high probability of failure in order to randomize results or disconcert opponents. Example overcalling a Precision 1♣ with 1♠ regardless of your strength or spade length, when your partnership agreement is that 1♠ is natural or some other convertion. (If overcalling 1♠ in this fashion is your partnership agreement, this is a Destructive Convention.)

I think this last example is a very bad one Mike. Imho to overcall 1C with 1S on 13 cards is a legitimate defence to a big C. We have used a 1H overcall NV on any 13 cards, and it had a high measure of success. (Can't use it now - its illegal).
A destructive psyche is one where the psycher psyches with no regard to results at all. The above does not fall into that category.

[Cascade]

The_Hog, on Feb 14 2004, 07:13 PM, said:

mikestar, on Feb 15 2004, 02:47 AM, said:

Destructive Psychic: A psychic bid made without regard to chances of success or in spite of high probability of failure in order to randomize results or disconcert opponents.  Example overcalling a Precision 1♣ with 1♠ regardless of your strength or spade length, when your partnership agreement is that 1♠ is natural or some other convertion. (If overcalling 1♠ in this fashion is your partnership agreement, this is a Destructive Convention.)

I think this last example is a very bad one Mike. Imho to overcall 1C with 1S on 13 cards is a legitimate defence to a big C. We have used a 1H overcall NV on any 13 cards, and it had a high measure of success. (Can't use it now - its illegal).
A destructive psyche is one where the psycher psyches with no regard to results at all. The above does not fall into that category.

Ron I think you are talking about something different than Mike.

Mike is talking about bidding 1♠ on anything when the agreement is something specific and different.

On the other hand you are describing an agreement to bid 1♠ on any 13 cards.

If you have that agreement then your call is no longer a psyche but a disclosable agreement.

Wayne

[lenze]

Cascade, on Feb 14 2004, 03:02 AM, said:

lenze, on Feb 13 2004, 06:42 PM, said:

Cascade, on Feb 13 2004, 10:34 PM, said:

lenze, on Feb 13 2004, 05:53 PM, said:

Quote

Do you alert?

NO!! The only alerts required are for your partnership agreements that are not standard. Your decision to bid 3NT has nothing to do with your partnership understandings.

If you have a partnership understanding about what 3NT shows then it may well be alertable.

Wayne

How can there be a partnership understanding in this sequence? As Ben pointed out, 3 NT is a desire to play in 3 NT. I can bid it with Ben's example hand
(Tactical), or I can bid it with

S-Kxx
H-Ax
D-x
C-AKQTxxx

Since partner is clueless, it is up the the opponents to work it out.

If the bidding proceeds:

3♦ (P) 3NT (4♠)
?

Is partner allowed to double based on your 3NT call?

If not then you have a special partnership understanding that must be disclosed.'

Wayne

NO! Partner can not double 4S. No partner I play with will ever preempt and bid again unless forced. That is called partnership disciple!! Look at it this way. When partner preempts and I bid, I am saying to him "STAY OUT OF MY AUCTION" It's as simple as that.

[hrothgar]

lenze, on Feb 17 2004, 06:40 PM, said:

>NO! Partner can not double 4S. No partner I play with will ever
>preempt and bid again unless forced. That is called partnership
>disciple!! Look at it this way. When partner preempts and I bid,
>I am saying to him "STAY OUT OF MY AUCTION" It's as simple as that.

Sounds suspiciously like a psychic control to me :-)

This is an excellent example of why I contend that "psyches" don't actually exist.

[inquiry]

As for whether or not partner can "dbl" 4♠ or not after opening 3♦ is somewhat of an open question. I am of the general philosophy that once you are preempted you are the mate and your partner is the captain of the auction. For instance if partner raises me in the the bidding goes...

2♠-(DBL)-3♠-4♥, I never, ever consider bidding again. I told my story with 2♠, maybe partner laid a trap for 4♥ for all I know. In fact I had this very hand against one of the BBF players yesterday where I held ♠JT9 ♥KQT8 ♦QJx ♣Axx and they took the bait and bid 4♥, which I merrily doubled. Almost sad note, my partner thought and thought and thought before he finally passed with his ♥ void. Needless to say, I would not have been too proud if he pulled.

Having said that, I would consider that partner's willingness to bid 3NT has set up a forcing pass situation on me. As the 3♦ bidder, I would feel free to double based upon the content of my hand. If my hand was particularily defensive/weak, I would think that a double was manditory, and if my hand was offensive in nature, I would feel free to bid 5♦, in fact, I would feel free to pass with a ♠ distributional control and then pull partners double to 5♦ to even suggest a potential slam (but I would have to have a very exceptional hand including excellent ♦ and a ♠ void.

I will note that there is little problem here here for the 3♦ preempter however. If partner psyched his 3NT bid willing to go down a ton of tricks undoubled, then surely he was thinking about running to 5♦ anyway. So if I as the 3♦ bidder wack 4♠ and partner pulls, it still doesn't mean partner psyched. Maybe he thinks 4♠ is make or down one, while we have a shot at 5♦, who knows.

Ben

[the hog]

>>NO! Partner can not double 4S. No partner I play with will ever preempt and bid again unless forced. That is called partnership disciple!! Look at it this way. When partner preempts and I bid, I am saying to him "STAY OUT OF MY AUCTION" It's as simple as that. <<

Lenze, while I agree with this if partner has bid in a situation where he may be operating, surely you would allow pre emptor to X for the lead in this situation
3S (4H) P (P)
x
when holding say
AKJxxxx
xxx
void
xxx
or similar
This has nothing to do with partnership discipline, it simply says with the right lead we have a good chance of beating this.

[mishovnbg]

...........................................Hi all!..........................................
...Several thoughts:

• How to psyche legal? Through partnersip agreements and alerting. For example with Ben we play 3NT as "to play or weak pre-empt with no any defense". Alerting and explaining such bid didn't help to opps, but is clear and fair.
  
• How to escape from psyches and don't make them ilegal to usage? By escaping scheme, valuable for normal bids and psyches - like passable suit + fit (thanks again to R/S, hehe).
  
• Deduction and discipline is primary way to play wining Bridge. It is ridiculous to ban player, who understand p psyche by counting! But can't surprise me, because of level of directors/administrators in all world, hehe.

... By the way, behaviour of p of pre-empter depend of way of preempt. I tried with sucsess very different way of 2 level of openig, where responder to 2 level pre-empt limit himself, while opener can have variable type of hands with one meaning - like to to play, instead of defend and can continue bidding anytime.
................................................................................................Misho

[etherwiz]

This does even incluude the another alternative . . . .

The just plain lucky. Sometimes that happens to the greatest of fools.

Also there is always when you and your partner passes but the bidding from the opps is such that just after they bid 4Hearts you realize that you and your partner have 10 spades between you (and therefore must have SOME Voids or singletons) and Down 3 NonVul is better then 4Hearts Vul and made (with overs yet).

But that is not really a psyc bid. It is good bridge that can occur to even a bigginner.

"You PASSED untill we bid game - AND THEN BID 4 Spades ? You Must Be Cheating !"

_*_Dave

[Free]

I haven't seen much beginners who make sacrifice bids...

[etherwiz]

Well, Actually, back then I did not realize it was a Sacrifice Bid. Some people MAY just get it right - and really not know why. Mostly now a days I get it wrong and realize after the play of cards where I went wrong. Better players will realize that and correct it a lot sooner ! And of course the best never make mistakes, right ?

_*_Dave

[inquiry]

etherwiz, on Feb 18 2004, 08:59 AM, said:

And of course the best never make mistakes, right ?

No, I made a mistake once.

But serioiusly, I hope your smiley face means you know that the best in fact do make mistakes. If ever an example of this was need the defense and then the declarer's play on the last hand of the bermuda bowl would be a fine example. Mistakes at bridge, even among the best players, is all too common. And if they
(the best) make mistakes... you know what the rest of us do... we blunder along so badly that we may not have a clue as to how bad we really play.

Ben

[lenze]

The_Hog, on Feb 18 2004, 01:18 AM, said:

>>NO! Partner can not double 4S. No partner I play with will ever preempt and bid again unless forced. That is called partnership disciple!! Look at it this way. When partner preempts and I bid, I am saying to him "STAY OUT OF MY AUCTION" It's as simple as that. <<

Lenze, while I agree with this if partner has bid in a situation where he may be operating, surely you would allow pre emptor to X for the lead in this situation
3S (4H) P (P)
x
when holding say
AKJxxxx
xxx
void
xxx
or similar
This has nothing to do with partnership discipline, it simply says with the right lead we have a good chance of beating this.

A very good point. With a trusted partner, your are correct. I just don't feel most players are up to this type of analysis.